Ladies Logic

Monday, August 04, 2008

Outflanking Speaker Pelosi

The Capital Hill drama continues today as Republican House members who are demanding a vote on energy policy take to the floor of the House today - while the Democrats in the House are on vacation. If you missed the fireworks on Friday, go to this American Thinker column now.

Speaker Nancy Pelosi was on This Week with George Stephanopoluous and he pressed her hard on why she was not allowing a vote on the issue. Speaker Pelosi could not give Stephanopolous a straight answer.

GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS, HOST: You've been getting a lot of heat for not allowing a straight up or down vote expanding drilling off the coasts of the United States. Why won't you permit a straight up or down vote?

NANCY PELOSI, SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE: What we have presented are options that will really make a difference at the pump. Free our oil, Mr. President. We're sitting on 700 million barrels of oil. That would have an immediate effect in ten days. What our colleagues are talking about is something that won't have an effect for ten years and it will be 2 cents at the time. If they want to present something that's part of an energy package, we're talking about something. But to single shoot on something that won't work and mislead the American people as to thinking it's going to reduce the price at the pump, I'm just not going to be a part of it.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Except it’s not just Republicans that are calling for this. Members of your own caucus say we must have a vote. Congressman Jason Altmire, let me show our viewers right now, says, “There is going to be a vote. September 30 will not come and go without a vote on the opening the Outer Continental Shelf. The message has been delivered. The issue can't be ignored any longer.” He says he speaks for a lot of Democrats. He's talked to the leadership and a vote must happen.

PELOSI: Maybe it will, as part of a larger energy package. Let's step back, call a halt and put this in perspective. What we have now is a failed energy policy by the Bush/Cheney, two oilmen in the White House. $4 a gallon gasoline at the pump. And what they're saying is let's have more of the same. Let's have more of big oil making, record profits, historic profits. You see the quarterly reports that just came out, who want to be subsidized who don't really want to compete. Let them use the subsidies to drill oil in protected areas. Instead we're saying, free the oil. Use it, don't lose it. There's 68 million acres in lower 48 and 20 million more acres in Alaska where they're permitted where they could drill anytime. This is a diversionary tactic from failed energy policies.


Notice how quick she is to try to pin HER failure on President Bush? To his credit - Stephanopolous didn't put up with it.

STEPHANOPOULOS: But if you feel you have the better arguments, why not give a straight up or down vote for drilling?

PELOSI: Because the misrepresentation is being made that this is going to reduce the price at the pump. This is again a decoy, it’s not a solution.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Well, if you’re right, why not let it be debated out and have the vote?


New technologies allowed the House Republicans to get the word out about what they were doing. Blog Talk Radio led the charge. They reported it first and longest staying with the story until late Friday night. I have no doubt that they will be covering it in depth again today. In addition, you can follow the action on Twitter where Reps. John Culberson and Pete Hoekstra Twittered the action Friday or you can follow it on Rep. Mike Pence's blog. Either way, don't want for the Main Stream Media to cover this protest - turn to Main STREET Media. I know I will be.

UPDATE: this will stay at the top of the page today as I update it. First update - Rep. Culberson is
posting videos of what is going on. Keep it bookmarked today and refresh often.

UPDATE 1: Rep. Culberson has posted a video interview of Rep. Mike Pence who is talking about the American Energy Act that the Republicans are trying to get debate and a vote on. All they are asking for is debate - is the Speaker that unsure of her stand that she is afraid to debate the issue?

UPDATE 2: MSNBC is even calling this a "
Revolution" and they are acknowledging that it won't be televised.

UPDATE 3: From Robert Bluey's
Twitter report:

Rep. Mike Conaway had a great line: "Nancy Pelosi's 'save the planet' fee is $4 gasoline."

OUCH! Townhall's group blog is also covering this.

UPDATE 4:
Rep. John Boehner's blog is live blogging this. Minnesota's own JOHN KLINE spoke today!

“There’s a saying that everything has been said but not everyone has said it, now it’s my turn. The question is what has Congress has done about the price of gasoline. The answer: Congress has done nothing.”


I miss that man already...

UPDATE 5: again from Rep. Boehner's blog - this time Rep. Mike Pence.

“The American people won’t get a vacation from high gasoline prices, so why should Congress take a five week vacation?”

A five week vacation at taxpayer expense that is.....

UPDATE THE LAST? Blogger is having FTP publishing issues. I don't know how many more updates I will be able to post until they clear this up. I'l going to run to the store and hopefully by then I will be fixed.

THE REAL FINAL UPDATE: Hopefully the FTP will be more cooperative tomorrow. Not much was reported after my last update (which is probably a good thing) but the House Republican Caucus will be back at it tomorrow. How long will this continue? I don't know - I do know that President Bush has indicated that he is not inclined toward calling Congress back at this point in time. Will he change his mind? I guess we need to stay tuned to find out for sure.

Labels:

17 Comments:

  • What does it take to get members of Congress to work during summer recess? Two disastrous wars? A failing economy? NO. But one phone call from Exxon Mobil and they rally around the microphones.

    What a spectacle. It's as if the oil companies are paying them by the hour...

    By Blogger rmwarnick, at 10:48 AM  

  • RM, cliche much? The post is about Nancy Pelosi refusing to allow democracy to work. The "spectacle" is the Democrat party running roughshod over the will of the American people.

    By Blogger Kermit, at 11:42 AM  

  • RMW - if the Republicans on the floor are tools (or as your Speaker called them "handmaidens") of big oil I guess that means that every middle class voter that is demanding that their reps provide so relief is ALSO a handmaiden of "big oil".

    I think I would rather be a tool of "big oil" than a tool of "BIG ENVIRO" like you on this issue. This issue is a loser for you - but go ahead and deny the people a debate....see what that gets you in November.

    LL

    By Blogger The Lady Logician, at 11:50 AM  

  • The best clip I've ever seen on Congress working in the summer can be found here.

    By Blogger Scott Hinrichs, at 12:28 PM  

  • The GOP consultants look at polls that show 75 percent support for offshore oil drilling, and think they have the public fooled. But you can only fool that many people in the short run. Eventually they learn the truth.

    It's almost sad to see them lunge for an illusory winning issue. If offshore oil drilling is such a great idea, why didn't Congress enact it when the Republicans were in charge?

    Speaker Pelosi blew the Stephanopoulos interview. She's a terrible spokesperson for the Democratic Party. But she is right, this whole "debate" is phony.

    By Blogger rmwarnick, at 2:03 PM  

  • If offshore oil drilling is such a great idea, why didn't Congress enact it when the Republicans were in charge?
    Um, because it wasn't an issue at the time? Just guessing.

    Eventually they learn the truth.
    Yup. They are learning that Democrats don't give a shit about them, and liberals actually hate them. Clarity is a good thing.

    By Blogger Kermit, at 2:41 PM  

  • I've just developed a newfound respect for George Stephanopoulos!

    Pelosi is worried, because as soon as we do begin the debate about drilling, the price will have a tendency to go down due to perceived potential increase in the supply of oil. It will assuredly go down when we begin to produce oil on the Outer Continental Shelf, if only for the reason that we don't have to pay for that portion of oil to be shipped across the ocean (but perceived increase in supply will help decrease prices, too).

    No one ever said that gas would be free, but none of us are expecting that. We're just expecting our Congress to look out for our best interests, that's all.

    By Blogger Frank Staheli, at 2:53 PM  

  • If they were looking out for our best interests, they wouldn't be wasting our time talking about offshore drilling, and would instead be voting on increasing our refining capabilities and taking our country out from under the thumb of Big Oil, who stopped playing by free market rules around 35 years ago.

    No real fan of Pelosi myself (I find it frustrating she's standing her ground on offshore drilling, but rolled over on FISA without much fight), but I applaud her for not wasting our time with this pointless vote that solves nothing.

    We've got to start expecting more, and educating ourselves on this issue. Seriously.

    By Blogger Jason The, at 3:15 PM  

  • For a quick overview of the facts about offshore drilling, let me recommend Bill Scher's piece on HuffPo today.

    As Senator Obama has pointed out, just with proper tire inflation and engine tune-ups we can save twice as much gas as we could get by offshore oil drilling. And the offshore oil wouldn't even affect gas prices until 2030.

    By Blogger rmwarnick, at 3:36 PM  

  • 2030? Are you nuts? We could get platforms up and producing in less than two years if we wanted to.

    RM, you are departing from the idiot talking points of the Left. 7 to 10 years would be 2015 to 2018. Now you dolts are saying 22 years?

    Get the Hell out of the way, fool.

    (P.S. Obama is lying.)

    By Blogger Kermit, at 4:14 PM  

  • Believe what you want to believe, but that doesn't make it a fact. The New York Times says that there is a global shortage of offshore drilling ships. The world’s existing drill-ships are booked solid for the next five years.It costs half a billion dollars to build a new one.

    Your plan to have new producing wells in two years is based on what?

    As far as conserving fuel, you don't have to believe Senator Obama. Senator McCain, the Department of Energy and the auto industry say the same thing.

    Offshore drilling on the Outer Continental Shelf, combined with drilling on the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge, would yield a savings of 6 cents/gallon two decades from now, at the cost of polluting pristine areas. By contrast, car maintenance can save 12 cents/gallon immediately.

    By Blogger rmwarnick, at 5:03 PM  

  • rmw - if your position and the facts are so compelling the why is Speaker Pelosi afraid to put it to floor debate and a vote? If the arguments against the American Energy Act (which BTW is NOT JUST ABOUT DRILLING) are so superior then there should be no fear to debate it should there?

    LL

    By Blogger The Lady Logician, at 5:23 PM  

  • Oh and your 2030 claim is a fallacy. If California started drilling next month, we could have oil from it in 90 to 120 DAYS according to geologists in California (I'll go look for the link) since they have platforms off of the coast already built. ANWR could be producing oil for the market in 2 years.

    Oh and another thing - mass production of alternative sources won't be available for almost as long - does that mean we should stop trying to provide those?

    Lastly - do a little math with me here. In order to save the 300,000 barrels a day of oil that OCS drilling is expected to provide, proper tire inflation would have to improve gas milage by at least 10%. Most car experts say that the BEST that you can get out of tire inflation is 3%. How many barrels a day does that put us short rwm?

    LL

    By Blogger The Lady Logician, at 5:29 PM  

  • Last I checked, we use drilling platforms not ships.

    would yield a savings of 6 cents/gallon two decades from now
    I thought it was 22 years. Make up your mind.

    And "pristine areas"? Are you serious? Didn't you see the ANWR pictures the Lady posted? Dude, the technonlogy has left you waaay behind. Join us in the 21st century.

    By Blogger Kermit, at 5:32 PM  

  • Oh rmw - how about posting a link yourself to back up your claims of 2030? After all, how are we supposed to educate ourselves on this....just take YOUR word for it?

    Or should we take the word of a congressman who sat in on testimony on the issue....someone like Rep John Peterson from PA.

    http://www.letfreedomringblog.com/?p=2882

    LL

    By Blogger The Lady Logician, at 6:02 PM  

  • Reach, that is an all-time classic!

    By Blogger Cameron, at 11:04 PM  

  • Just face it, the oil companies have had everything they want for too many years. It would be nice if somebody could finally say "no" to them.

    I wonder if Speaker Pelosi can take the heat, she has caved on every other issue. And plenty of Dems have accepted money from Big Oil.

    A Department of Energy study released last year predicted that granting access to new offshore leases would not begin to produce any actual oil until around 2020, and would have no "significant impact on domestic crude oil and natural gas production or prices before 2030," if ever.

    I know nuance is hard for you, but the DOE gives one date for the start of new offshore production and another date for significant impact on the market as a result of ramping up production.

    By Blogger rmwarnick, at 10:12 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home